Skip to main content

tv   White House Briefing  CSPAN  October 30, 2017 3:35pm-4:02pm EDT

3:35 pm
those investigations continue with a couple of hearings coming up this week. google, facebook, twitter executives will testify on russia's use of social media and its influence in the 2016 race. that hearing coming up tuesday, 2:30 eastern on c-span 3 command a return to testify before two other committees, the senate intelligence committee per you can watch that live on c-span3 and all the hearings online at member of the, a white house spokesman sarah sanders should resign them and she likes credibility and outright lies to the american people. -- should resign. she outright lies and likes credibility to the american people.
3:36 pm
she also took questions on today's indictments. >> afternoon. would like to start the briefing today by addressing a topic i know all of you are me about, andsk that is tax reform. [laughter] sara: couple of you got it. it will be introduced by the house and wanes committee.
3:37 pm
house in ways committee. it is going to a open process in the house. billouse will consider the week of november 13. the house is likely to consider the bill the week of november 13. in order to stay on pace, we want to see a house bill passed by thanksgiving. this is a very aggressive timeline, but families and businesses can plan for 2018. we look forward to the details of the tax bill being released on wednesday. i want to take a step back and explain what we want to do. this story has been floating around the internet for a while. it is important to keep in mind that the numbers are not correct. and i'm also not encouraging any drinking. i think you will enjoy. for our purposes, will say reporters go out for beer. the bill for all 10 comes to $100. if these 10 reporters pay their tab every night the way we pay our taxes, it will go something like this.
3:38 pm
the first would pay nothing very the fifth would pay one dollar, the sixth would pay three dollars, the seventh would pay seven dollars, the eighth would pay $12, and the ninth would pay $18, and the richest would pay $59. that is what they decided to do. the 10 reporters drink in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until one day, the bar owner threw them a curve ball. you are all such good customers, i am going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. drinks for the 10 reporters will cost just $80. the group wanted to stay -- still pay their bill the way we pay our taxes pay the first forward unaffected. they would drink for free. what about the other six? how could they divide the windfall so everyone would get their fair share? these are the reporters and they are concerned with fairness. if they subtracted that from everybody share, than the fifth reporter and the six reporter
3:39 pm
would each end up being paid to drink beer. so the bar owner suggested it would be fair to reduce each man's percentage. by doing that, they continued following the principle of the tax system they had been using. he proceeded to work out the amounts that each should pay. so the fifth reporter, like the first or now paid nothing. he got a 100% savings. the sixth now paid two dollars instead of three dollars, a 30 -- a 33% savings. the seventh paints five dollars instead of seven. the eighth paid nine dollars instead of 12. a 20% savings. the ninth paid now $14 and $718, saving. the 10th now paid $49 instead of $59, a 16% savings. each of the six was better off than before, and a first for continued to drink for free. once outside the bar, the
3:40 pm
reporters compared to her savings. i only got a dollar said the six reporter. she pointed to the 10th reporter and said he got 10. that is right. i only saved a dollar. it is unfair that he received 10 times more benefit than me. that is true. why should he get $10 back when i only got 2. the wealthy get all the breaks. wait a minute, yelled the first four in unison, we didn't get anything at all. this new tax system exploits the poor. the non-reporters yelled at the tent and made him feel bad. th and made him feel bad. the next tonight, the 10th man didn't return for drinks. the nine had their beers without him. when it came time to pay the bill, they discover they no longer had enough money between them all to even cover half of the bill. and that, ladies and gentlemen, is how our tax works. taxing them too much and attack them, they might start thinking -- drinking overseas where the atmosphere is friendlier. this is a silly story, but it illustrates very important
3:41 pm
points. our tax cuts and reforms will create a fair system that works better for everyone. it will make our country the friendliest in the world for american families trying to build a better life for their selves and their families and american company seeking a competitive edge. i will be happy to get that story to everyone so you can get the numbers later. i know that may be an oversimplification, but i think it paints a very good picture of the tax system. with that i will take your questions. >> i would like to get white house reaction to the indictment of paul manafort and gates. specifically, we have heard a couple tweets from the president. if you can help me understand, when he says why aren't crooked hillary and dems the focus, is the president saying that special counsel mueller should be investigating hillary clinton and the democrats, and is he going to roll out firing robert firingout -- rule out
3:42 pm
robert mueller? sarah: i said last week, and i have said several times that, there is no intention or plan to make any changes in regards to special counsel. today's announcement has nothing to do with the president. it has nothing to do with the president's campaign or campaign activity. the real collusion scandal, as we have said before, has everything to do with the clinton campaign, fusion gps, and russia. there is clear evidence of the clinton campaign colluding to smear the president and influence the election. we have been saying from day one there is no evidence of trump-russia collusion and nothing in the indictment changes that today. >> specifically about the campaign? sarah: it has nothing to do with the campaign, it is his failure to tell the truth. >> [indiscernible]
3:43 pm
sarah: the trump campaign was not engaged in these activities . most took place before the campaign ever existed. >> can you explain what george papadopoulos' role was. sarah: it was extremely limited. it was a volunteer position. no activity was ever done in an official capacity on behalf of the campaign. >> what about the outreach acing the campaign officials trying to put together -- sarah: it was repeatedly denied. will not take action on that. >> can you explain with -- what happened with the outreach? sarah: it shows his level of importance in the campaign and it shows what little role he had within coordinating anything officially for the campaign. >> i wanted to ask about mr. mueller's investigation. the president has called it a hoax and a witchhunt.
3:44 pm
last week, you indicated that you believe that mr. mueller is wrapping up his investigation. i have heard similar things coming from administration officials. do you still believe mr. mueller is in the process of wrapping up his investigation? sarah: we still expected to -- expect this to conclude soon. >> i would like to know what the president's relationship is with them now. do they still talk? sarah: they have not spoken in several months. the last conversation was back in february. anything beyond that i am not sure. there was initial contact after the president was sworn in, with
3:45 pm
him meeting at the white house. nothing directly with the president. on march 31, according to the affidavit, he attended a foreign policy meeting and the president was there. he said that he talked about that russia wanted to talk to the president. what did the president think when they say they wanted to arrange a menace -- meeting, and how did other people in the campaign react to that? sarah: i'm not sure he recalls specific details of the meeting. it was a brief meeting that took place quite some time ago. it was the one time the group ever met. beyond that, i don't have anything to add. >> as you mentioned, mr. manna -- manafort, mr. gates, had nothing to do with the campaign but a legend money laundering moneyegedly laundering
3:46 pm
for other business. under those circumstances, with the president consider a rollout pardoning them? sarah: i have not had any conversations with impaired we with that. we shall the process go through. >> papadopoulos was referring to jeff sessions at the time overseeing foreign policy committee. what does this mean for jeff sessions? sarah: somebody on a volunteer committee, i'm that sure how that would concern the attorney general directly. >> can you say given what we have learned over the last few hours, when the president was first aware that russia was behind the hacking and what they considered to be damaged emails about the claim command that way -- they were trying to get to the trump campaign? when was the first aware of that? not sure of the
3:47 pm
specific date when that took place. >> does he regret hiring paul manafort? are they concerned this issue will distract from issues? sarah: he is not worried about it distracting because it is nothing to do with us. this took place outside of the campaign or campaign activity. i did not ask him that specifically. >> how can you describe mr. papadopoulos having a limited role when there is a photograph of him sitting at a table with candidate from? sarah: he met with millions of people. >> he was also cited by president trump in a meeting in washington. -- with the washington post. that seems to go against what you are saying. how is it not collusion when george, who is in contact with various people come a promising dirt on hillary clinton, a series of events that closely
3:48 pm
mirrors what occurred with the president's own son? in pursuit of information that was damaging about the clintons. how is that not collusion? sarah: this individual was a member of a volunteer advisory council that met one time over the course of a year. he was part of a list that was read out in the washington post i would hardly call that some sort of regular advisor or as you want to push that he is a senior member of the staff. he was not paid by the campaign to you as a volunteer on a council that met once. >> in regard to the collusion activity, he was pursuing information from russians. sarah: he was a volunteer. you'll have to ask him. i am not here to speak on behalf of thousands that may have volunteered on the campaign. >> i have a question on tax reform. the president called on congress to investigate hillary clinton.
3:49 pm
is he confident they will do that? sarah: you would have to ask congress. there are enough reports and information that suggests it might not be a bad idea. i don't know if he has had a member of congress specifically tell him. >> on tax reform, where does the president stand on corporate tax cut's reaching 20%? sarah: his priority is to make sure that is where we start with the tax plan currently. he has laid out what his principles are. as of now that has not changed. george had noy official capacity, what do you mean by that? sarah: i mean he was a volunteer on the campaign and a volunteer member of an advisory committee that met one time. >> so these activities were his invention. no one asked him to do these things? is that what you are telling
3:50 pm
the american public? sarah: i am telling you he was a volunteer of a counsel them at -- cancel that met one time. >> there were two episodes that people associate with the campaign with george papadopoulos as a member of a foreign policy board. they sought dirt on hillary clinton from people representing themselves. is that a coincidence? sarah: the only interaction i am aware of that deals with this individual was him at reaching out and being repeatedly denied. that is all i can tell you. he asked to do things. he was a sickly pushed back or not responded to. any action that he took would be on his own, and you will have to ask him about that. >> but he had the same kind of meaning in trump tower. what explains that later those -- later involvement with those associated with the russian
3:51 pm
government and getting information on hillary clinton? it is not a pattern? sarah: it is not a pattern of getting information about your opponent. the big difference is you have a meeting that took lace versus millions of dollars to create fake information to influence the election. when you compare those two, they are apples and oranges per what the clinton campaign and the dnc did was actually exchange money. they took a meeting. they are far different. one is a common practice to take a meeting. the other one is actually paying money to get false information. that is a big difference. >> if i could follow up on the comments, many senior levels have pointed to during the questions about the special counsel. has the white house asked the department of justice to look into this issue? sarah: not that i am aware of. us his yo can you give
3:52 pm
reaction? two people who did work for his campaign. was he disappointed? that he was being charged. sarah: he responded the same way the rest of us have, without much reaction because we ar it has other to do with us. >> they are now under federal indictment. doesn't it speak to the president's judgment that he would have these individuals in these positions? sarah: you make it sound like they were regular offenders and massive amounts of trouble. paul manafort was brought in to these were seasoned operatives.
3:53 pm
manafort was brought into lead the delegate process. which he did and was dismissed after that. >> so the president has no regrets? sarah: i didn't ask him that question. >> you believe the investigation will end soon and you believe there are more indictments. can you try and fight -- are you trying to find out how to implement welfare reform? sarah: we have not made any decisions on welfare reform. they are ongoing conversations, and we are looking at ways to improve the system. nothing specific to roll out at this time. believeleads you to this will conclude the mueller investigation? have you been given a heads up? sarah: those are the indications we have at this time. >> indications from where? sarah: i can't go into that any further.
3:54 pm
>> you don't think there'll be more indictments? sarah: we believe that it will be concluded soon. beyond that i don't have anything to add on a specific time frame. march, the president called george an excellent guide. does he still believe that? sarah: he was going through the list of names with the washington post. theas complementary of people volunteering on behalf of the campaign. nothing more than that. >> [inaudible] i would encourage you to make the trip to russia. constituteat not the campaign encouraging him? sarah: i am not aware of that.
3:55 pm
i cannot comment. >> is any concern from the administration that two people turned out to be prominent? is this an example of the best people to higher? sarah: these were activities that took part outside of the campaign. the president hired paul manafort to handle the delicate process, which he did, and he was dismissed not too long after that. >> administration allowed undocumented immigrants to have an abortion. what is the white house reaction to that? sarah: i cannot comment on that at this point. i did not speak to him directly about the case. >> i would like to ask you about a different topic.
3:56 pm
the court banned the president from changing military policy on transgender people. what is the reaction from the white house moving forward about trans-genders in the military? sarah: the department of justice has that and i will refer you to them for any specific questions. >> a congressman has suggested there should be an investigation into the legs of the grand jury investigation, and robert mueller's investigation. you think they are should be an investigation? sarah: we have not asked for that to take place. anytime there is leaking of sensitive information, it should be looked into. >> is the president in any way held [indiscernible] sarah: not that i am aware of. >> does this not risk questions about president trump's vetting process and judgment when it
3:57 pm
comes to bringing on people? sarah: i don't believe so. i have answered that quite a few times today. >> you said the investigation for the special counsel and russian meddling, given what we learned today, does the president think that is over the bounds? sarah: i have not asked him that question. >> regarding the plea agreement with george papadopoulos. you indicated the president did not remember the meeting. sarah: i did not say he didn't remember the speeches, he didn't remember the comments. believe he went into detail about the meeting itself. he remembers it taking place. >> he didn't remember the russian comments? or that papadopoulos was present? >> what is your reaction and has the present changed anything?
3:58 pm
-- changing anything. sarah: we are pushing forward on a bold agenda with tax reform and tax cut's -- cuts. the economy continues to grow and strengthen. at the same time, these are some of the same polls that also said the president would never be president. i do not have a lot of confidence in them. >> can you please clarify if the stock market is moving downward that possibly the corporate rate could change over several years . i wasn't sure that you are trying to make the point that the president would be for or against it. sarah: the president laid out his principal and it does not include the phasing and we are still committed to that moving forward. i don't have any reasonably good reasons to change it. >> the redline line of 20%. adjusted have not
3:59 pm
since this process started. thanks so much, guys. have a good day. what's the c-span bus is traveling across the country. we stopped in nashville, tennessee asking folks what is the most important issue in their state? >> one important issue to me is the difference in gender wages. women are paid less than men for the same jobs. i feel they should be paid the same amount. >> i'm a junior from nashville, tennessee. an important issue to me is education. tennessee has done a great job i think it should be there across the federal level. >> an important issue to me is protecting the right to live.
4:00 pm
a poor removal -- important issue to me is the daca removal. >> mining is medicine. what is important for me is for every child in america to receive and arts education. he gives them the skills to not just understand other coulters and ideas but develop their own voice and interact with overrent people from all the world who might have a different point of view from them. >> voigses from the states. >> here on c-span, we're expecting to hear shortly from senate majority leader mitch mcconnell, possibly other senators as well on judicial nominations. the foe coufs the senate's work this week, they gaveled in about an hour ago to begin their work this week. the house itself will be in
4:01 pm
beginning tomorrow. as the senate opened today, the majority leader called on his colleagues to confirm qualified judges and not vote based on the nominees' religious beliefs. we'll show you mitch mcconnell's comments as we wait to hear from him live at the capitol. senator mcconnell: for the past eight years we had a president who chose nominees on the empathy standard, to find nominees who would favor certain grureps individuals over others. it's a great standard if you're the party in the case whom the judge has empathy for. it's not so great if you're the other person.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on